> disingenuous because if he believed what he says then he'd stop.

Why do you think so?

Because I find the cognitive dissonance of saying it's dangerous while flying as fast as possible to an IPO too much to take. I just don't understand how others parse this differently.

▲

stratos123 a day ago | parent [-]

So you're saying that if Dario truly thought what he says he does, he'd resign/dissolve the company somehow/unilaterally slow down? I see two problems with this:

First, Dario thinks that OpenAI will continue racing even if he stops, so there is, by his values, no point in stopping. Do you disagree with this, and think he should stop anyway?

Second, what's your take on, for example, Jacob Coxon, who did resign from Anthropic a few days ago after realizing they aren't being responsible? Do you agree that he, at least, does believe in AI risk?

	▲	Ydarbleoj a day ago \| parent [-]
		I get it. I do. I just believe we live in a world where our corporate leaders speak out of both sides of their mouths. And typically, people who get to these positions are not the Jacob Coxon's of the world. That is to say, I've been places where I tried really hard within teams to change certain things that I thought were broken only to find out that what the leadership said and how they acted were divorced from my and many others experiences. And so I did leave in those instances (and please read this not as I didn't get my way but total dysfunction behind beautiful facades). So, I do think if he really felt as he felt he'd do something different than ultimately yelling "somebody stop me!".